renforge_saves

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the exclusion of screenshot payloads, which is a useful behavioral note, but it does not disclose side effects, permissions, or state changes beyond the basic save/load/list actions. This is insufficient for a tool that likely mutates save data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the core function. It is efficient and avoids unnecessary words, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 5 parameters and no schema descriptions, and the description omits any parameter guidance. While an output schema exists, the description is still incomplete for a tool with multiple actions and parameters. It provides only a minimal overview and leaves significant gaps for the agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of them. The concepts of 'named save slots' imply the 'slot' parameter, and 'save, load, or list' imply the 'action' parameter, but no explicit mapping or guidance is provided for 'regexp', 'extra_info', or 'project_path'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool's purpose: saving, loading, and listing named save slots. It also adds a distinguishing detail ('without screenshot payloads') that differentiates it from potential alternatives. However, the multiple actions are not explicitly tied to the 'action' parameter, leaving slight ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'without screenshot payloads' implies a use case where screenshots are not needed, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of others, nor does it mention any alternatives. Usage context is present but not fully developed.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.